MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Egg Development in the Stonefly <i>Pteronarcys californica</i> Newport (Plecoptera: Pteronarcyidae)

2000· article· en· W2043864769 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Greg D. Townsend, Gordon Pritchard

Bibliographic record

VenueAquatic Insects · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFreshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDirectorate for Biological SciencesUniversity of California, Santa Cruz
KeywordsBiologyHatchingDiapauseLarvaAnimal sciencePopulationEcologyZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eggs of Pteronarcys californica Newport were incubated at fixed temperatures between 5 and 20°C in the laboratory and at field temperatures in the Crowsnest River, Alberta. The regression of rate of development on temperature between 5–15°C gave a developmental zero of 3.125°C. Within the range 10–20°C, highest hatching success and fewest days to median hatch occurred at 15.0 or 17.5°C, but physiological time (day-degrees) for egg hatching increased with temperature throughout, markedly so above 15°C. A minimum of 182 days was required for 50% hatch in the laboratory, with no observable development for approximately 80 days. Eggs placed in the river on 25 May 1993 started to hatch on 17 October 1993, and the pulse of larval recruitment in the field population occurred between April and August, 11 to 15 months after oviposition. Eggs hatched over periods of 130–322 days at different temperatures in the laboratory, and over an 11-month period in the field. The placement of diapause early in embryonic development is suggested as a cause of extended recruitment. The variety of embryonic development in Plecoptera is briefly reviewed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.181 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAquatic InsectsSame topicFreshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecologyFrench-language works237,207